-
Brain, Behavior, and Immunity Mar 2022COVID-19 is associated with clinically significant symptoms despite resolution of the acute infection (i.e., post-COVID-19 syndrome). Fatigue and cognitive impairment... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
IMPORTANCE
COVID-19 is associated with clinically significant symptoms despite resolution of the acute infection (i.e., post-COVID-19 syndrome). Fatigue and cognitive impairment are amongst the most common and debilitating symptoms of post-COVID-19 syndrome.
OBJECTIVE
To quantify the proportion of individuals experiencing fatigue and cognitive impairment 12 or more weeks following COVID-19 diagnosis, and to characterize the inflammatory correlates and functional consequences of post-COVID-19 syndrome.
DATA SOURCES
Systematic searches were conducted without language restrictions from database inception to June 8, 2021 on PubMed/MEDLINE, The Cochrane Library, PsycInfo, Embase, Web of Science, Google/Google Scholar, and select reference lists.
STUDY SELECTION
Primary research articles which evaluated individuals at least 12 weeks after confirmed COVID-19 diagnosis and specifically reported on fatigue, cognitive impairment, inflammatory parameters, and/or functional outcomes were selected.
DATA EXTRACTION & SYNTHESIS
Two reviewers independently extracted published summary data and assessed methodological quality and risk of bias. A meta-analysis of proportions was conducted to pool Freeman-Tukey double arcsine transformed proportions using the random-effects restricted maximum-likelihood model.
MAIN OUTCOMES & MEASURES
The co-primary outcomes were the proportions of individuals reporting fatigue and cognitive impairment, respectively, 12 or more weeks following COVID-19 infection. The secondary outcomes were inflammatory correlates and functional consequences associated with post-COVID-19 syndrome.
RESULTS
The literature search yielded 10,979 studies, and 81 studies were selected for inclusion. The fatigue meta-analysis comprised 68 studies, the cognitive impairment meta-analysis comprised 43 studies, and 48 studies were included in the narrative synthesis. Meta-analysis revealed that the proportion of individuals experiencing fatigue 12 or more weeks following COVID-19 diagnosis was 0.32 (95% CI, 0.27, 0.37; p < 0.001; n = 25,268; I = 99.1%). The proportion of individuals exhibiting cognitive impairment was 0.22 (95% CI, 0.17, 0.28; p < 0.001; n = 13,232; I = 98.0). Moreover, narrative synthesis revealed elevations in proinflammatory markers and considerable functional impairment in a subset of individuals.
CONCLUSIONS & RELEVANCE
A significant proportion of individuals experience persistent fatigue and/or cognitive impairment following resolution of acute COVID-19. The frequency and debilitating nature of the foregoing symptoms provides the impetus to characterize the underlying neurobiological substrates and how to best treat these phenomena.
STUDY REGISTRATION
PROSPERO (CRD42021256965).
Topics: COVID-19; COVID-19 Testing; Cognitive Dysfunction; Fatigue; Humans; SARS-CoV-2; Post-Acute COVID-19 Syndrome
PubMed: 34973396
DOI: 10.1016/j.bbi.2021.12.020 -
European Psychiatry : the Journal of... Jan 2019New research suggests that, rather than representing a core feature of autism spectrum disorder (ASD), emotional processing difficulties reflect co-occurring... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
New research suggests that, rather than representing a core feature of autism spectrum disorder (ASD), emotional processing difficulties reflect co-occurring alexithymia. Autistic individuals with alexithymia could therefore represent a specific subgroup of autism who may benefit from tailored interventions. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to explore the nature and prevalence of alexithymia in autism using the Toronto Alexithymia Scale (TAS).
METHODS
Online scientific databases were searched systematically for studies on ASD popu lations using the TAS. Meta-analyses were performed to evaluate differences in scores between the ASD and neurotypical groups, and to determine the prevalence of alexithymia in these populations.
RESULTS
15 articles comparing autistic and neurotypical (NT) groups were identified. Autistic people scored significantly higher on all scores compared to the NT group. There was also a higher prevalence of alexithymia in the ASD group (49.93% compared to 4.89%), with a significantly increased risk of alexithymia in autistic participants.
CONCLUSIONS
This review highlights that alexithymia is common, rather than universal, in ASD, supporting a growing body of evidence that co-occurring autism and alexithymia represents a specific subgroup in the ASD population that may have specific clinical needs. More research is needed to understand the nature and implications of co-occurring ASD and alexithymia.
Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Affective Symptoms; Autistic Disorder; Comorbidity; Emotional Adjustment; Female; Humans; Male; Prevalence; Psychological Tests
PubMed: 30399531
DOI: 10.1016/j.eurpsy.2018.09.004 -
BMC Public Health Nov 2021Drug abuse is detrimental, and excessive drug usage is a worldwide problem. Drug usage typically begins during adolescence. Factors for drug abuse include a variety of...
BACKGROUND
Drug abuse is detrimental, and excessive drug usage is a worldwide problem. Drug usage typically begins during adolescence. Factors for drug abuse include a variety of protective and risk factors. Hence, this systematic review aimed to determine the risk and protective factors of drug abuse among adolescents worldwide.
METHODS
Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) was adopted for the review which utilized three main journal databases, namely PubMed, EBSCOhost, and Web of Science. Tobacco addiction and alcohol abuse were excluded in this review. Retrieved citations were screened, and the data were extracted based on strict inclusion and exclusion criteria. Inclusion criteria include the article being full text, published from the year 2016 until 2020 and provided via open access resource or subscribed to by the institution. Quality assessment was done using Mixed Methods Appraisal Tools (MMAT) version 2018 to assess the methodological quality of the included studies. Given the heterogeneity of the included studies, a descriptive synthesis of the included studies was undertaken.
RESULTS
Out of 425 articles identified, 22 quantitative articles and one qualitative article were included in the final review. Both the risk and protective factors obtained were categorized into three main domains: individual, family, and community factors. The individual risk factors identified were traits of high impulsivity; rebelliousness; emotional regulation impairment, low religious, pain catastrophic, homework completeness, total screen time and alexithymia; the experience of maltreatment or a negative upbringing; having psychiatric disorders such as conduct problems and major depressive disorder; previous e-cigarette exposure; behavioral addiction; low-perceived risk; high-perceived drug accessibility; and high-attitude to use synthetic drugs. The familial risk factors were prenatal maternal smoking; poor maternal psychological control; low parental education; negligence; poor supervision; uncontrolled pocket money; and the presence of substance-using family members. One community risk factor reported was having peers who abuse drugs. The protective factors determined were individual traits of optimism; a high level of mindfulness; having social phobia; having strong beliefs against substance abuse; the desire to maintain one's health; high paternal awareness of drug abuse; school connectedness; structured activity and having strong religious beliefs.
CONCLUSION
The outcomes of this review suggest a complex interaction between a multitude of factors influencing adolescent drug abuse. Therefore, successful adolescent drug abuse prevention programs will require extensive work at all levels of domains.
Topics: Adolescent; Depressive Disorder, Major; Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems; Female; Humans; Pregnancy; Protective Factors; Risk Factors; Schools; Substance-Related Disorders
PubMed: 34774013
DOI: 10.1186/s12889-021-11906-2 -
Nutrients Apr 2017Anxiety related conditions are the most common affective disorders present in the general population with a lifetime prevalence of over 15%. Magnesium (Mg) status is... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Anxiety related conditions are the most common affective disorders present in the general population with a lifetime prevalence of over 15%. Magnesium (Mg) status is associated with subjective anxiety, leading to the proposition that Mg supplementation may attenuate anxiety symptoms. This systematic review examines the available evidence for the efficacy of Mg supplementation in the alleviation of subjective measures of anxiety and stress.
METHODS
A systematic search of interventions with Mg alone or in combination (up to 5 additional ingredients) was performed in May 2016. Ovid Medline, PsychInfo, Embase, CINAHL and Cochrane databases were searched using equivalent search terms. A grey literature review of relevant sources was also undertaken.
RESULTS
18 studies were included in the review. All reviewed studies recruited samples based upon an existing vulnerability to anxiety: mildly anxious, premenstrual syndrome (PMS), postpartum status, and hypertension. Four/eight studies in anxious samples, four/seven studies in PMS samples, and one/two studies in hypertensive samples reported positive effects of Mg on subjective anxiety outcomes. Mg had no effect on postpartum anxiety. No study administered a validated measure of subjective stress as an outcome.
CONCLUSIONS
Existing evidence is suggestive of a beneficial effect of Mg on subjective anxiety in anxiety vulnerable samples. However, the quality of the existing evidence is poor. Well-designed randomised controlled trials are required to further confirm the efficacy of Mg supplementation.
Topics: Anxiety; Dietary Supplements; Humans; Magnesium; Stress, Physiological
PubMed: 28445426
DOI: 10.3390/nu9050429 -
CNS Drugs Oct 2021Borderline personality disorder (BPD) is a debilitating psychiatric disorder that affects 0.4-3.9% of the population in Western countries. Currently, no medications have... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Borderline personality disorder (BPD) is a debilitating psychiatric disorder that affects 0.4-3.9% of the population in Western countries. Currently, no medications have been approved by regulatory agencies for the treatment of BPD. Nevertheless, up to 96% of patients with BPD receive at least one psychotropic medication.
OBJECTIVES
The objective of this systematic review was to assess the general efficacy and the comparative effectiveness of different pharmacological treatments for BPD patients.
METHODS
We conducted systematic literature searches limited to English language in MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and PsycINFO up to April 6, 2021, and searched reference lists of pertinent articles and reviews. Inclusion criteria were (i) patients 13 years or older with a diagnosis of BPD, (ii) treatment with anticonvulsive medications, antidepressants, antipsychotic medications, benzodiazepines, melatonin, opioid agonists or antagonists, or sedative or hypnotic medications for at least 8 weeks, (iii) comparison with placebo or an eligible medication, (iv) assessment of health-relevant outcomes, (v) randomized or non-randomized trials or controlled observational studies. Two investigators independently screened abstracts and full-text articles and graded the certainty of evidence based on the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach. For meta-analyses, we used restricted maximum likelihood random effects models to estimate pooled effects.
RESULTS
Of 12,062 unique records, we included 21 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with data on 1768 participants. Nineteen RCTs compared pharmacotherapies with placebo; two RCTs assessed active treatments head-to-head. Out of 87 medications in use in clinical practice, we found studies on just nine. Overall, the evidence indicates that the efficacy of pharmacotherapies for the treatment of BPD is limited. Second-generation antipsychotics, anticonvulsants, and antidepressants were not able to consistently reduce the severity of BPD. Low-certainty evidence indicates that anticonvulsants can improve specific symptoms associated with BPD such as anger, aggression, and affective lability but the evidence is mostly limited to single studies. Second-generation antipsychotics had little effect on the severity of specific BPD symptoms, but they improved general psychiatric symptoms in patients with BPD.
CONCLUSIONS
Despite the common use of pharmacotherapies for patients with BPD, the available evidence does not support the efficacy of pharmacotherapies alone to reduce the severity of BPD.
REGISTRATION
PROSPERO registration number, CRD42020194098.
Topics: Anticonvulsants; Antidepressive Agents, Second-Generation; Antipsychotic Agents; Borderline Personality Disorder; Humans; Psychotropic Drugs; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 34495494
DOI: 10.1007/s40263-021-00855-4 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jul 2022Schizophrenia is a disabling psychotic disorder characterised by positive symptoms of delusions, hallucinations, disorganised speech and behaviour; and negative symptoms... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Schizophrenia is a disabling psychotic disorder characterised by positive symptoms of delusions, hallucinations, disorganised speech and behaviour; and negative symptoms such as affective flattening and lack of motivation. Cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) is a psychological intervention that aims to change the way in which a person interprets and evaluates their experiences, helping them to identify and link feelings and patterns of thinking that underpin distress. CBT models targeting symptoms of psychosis (CBTp) have been developed for many mental health conditions including schizophrenia. CBTp has been suggested as a useful add-on therapy to medication for people with schizophrenia. While CBT for people with schizophrenia was mainly developed as an individual treatment, it is expensive and a group approach may be more cost-effective. Group CBTp can be defined as a group intervention targeting psychotic symptoms, based on the cognitive behavioural model. In group CBTp, people work collaboratively on coping with distressing hallucinations, analysing evidence for their delusions, and developing problem-solving and social skills. However, the evidence for effectiveness is far from conclusive.
OBJECTIVES
To investigate efficacy and acceptability of group CBT applied to psychosis compared with standard care or other psychosocial interventions, for people with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder.
SEARCH METHODS
On 10 February 2021, we searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's Study-Based Register of Trials, which is based on CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, four other databases and two trials registries. We handsearched the reference lists of relevant papers and previous systematic reviews and contacted experts in the field for supplemental data.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We selected randomised controlled trials allocating adults with schizophrenia to receive either group CBT for schizophrenia, compared with standard care, or any other psychosocial intervention (group or individual).
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We complied with Cochrane recommended standard of conduct for data screening and collection. Where possible, we calculated risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) for binary data and mean difference (MD) and 95% CI for continuous data. We used a random-effects model for analyses. We assessed risk of bias for included studies and created a summary of findings table using GRADE.
MAIN RESULTS
The review includes 24 studies (1900 participants). All studies compared group CBTp with treatments that a person with schizophrenia would normally receive in a standard mental health service (standard care) or any other psychosocial intervention (group or individual). None of the studies compared group CBTp with individual CBTp. Overall risk of bias within the trials was moderate to low. We found no studies reporting data for our primary outcome of clinically important change. With regard to numbers of participants leaving the study early, group CBTp has little or no effect compared to standard care or other psychosocial interventions (RR 1.22, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.59; studies = 13, participants = 1267; I = 9%; low-certainty evidence). Group CBTp may have some advantage over standard care or other psychosocial interventions for overall mental state at the end of treatment for endpoint scores on the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) total (MD -3.73, 95% CI -4.63 to -2.83; studies = 12, participants = 1036; I = 5%; low-certainty evidence). Group CBTp seems to have little or no effect on PANSS positive symptoms (MD -0.45, 95% CI -1.30 to 0.40; studies =8, participants = 539; I = 0%) and on PANSS negative symptoms scores at the end of treatment (MD -0.73, 95% CI -1.68 to 0.21; studies = 9, participants = 768; I = 65%). Group CBTp seems to have an advantage over standard care or other psychosocial interventions on global functioning measured by Global Assessment of Functioning (GAF; MD -3.61, 95% CI -6.37 to -0.84; studies = 5, participants = 254; I = 0%; moderate-certainty evidence), Personal and Social Performance Scale (PSP; MD 3.30, 95% CI 2.00 to 4.60; studies = 1, participants = 100), and Social Disability Screening Schedule (SDSS; MD -1.27, 95% CI -2.46 to -0.08; studies = 1, participants = 116). Service use data were equivocal with no real differences between treatment groups for number of participants hospitalised (RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.38 to 1.60; studies = 3, participants = 235; I = 34%). There was no clear difference between group CBTp and standard care or other psychosocial interventions endpoint scores on depression and quality of life outcomes, except for quality of life measured by World Health Organization Quality of Life Assessment Instrument (WHOQOL-BREF) Psychological domain subscale (MD -4.64, 95% CI -9.04 to -0.24; studies = 2, participants = 132; I = 77%). The studies did not report relapse or adverse effects.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Group CBTp appears to be no better or worse than standard care or other psychosocial interventions for people with schizophrenia in terms of leaving the study early, service use and general quality of life. Group CBTp seems to be more effective than standard care or other psychosocial interventions on overall mental state and global functioning scores. These results may not be widely applicable as each study had a low sample size. Therefore, no firm conclusions concerning the efficacy of group CBTp for people with schizophrenia can currently be made. More high-quality research, reporting useable and relevant data is needed.
Topics: Adult; Cognitive Behavioral Therapy; Hallucinations; Humans; Psychotic Disorders; Quality of Life; Schizophrenia
PubMed: 35866377
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD009608.pub2 -
Brain, Behavior, and Immunity Aug 2020COVID-19 pandemic has the potential to significantly affect the mental health of healthcare workers (HCWs), who stand in the frontline of this crisis. It is, therefore,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
COVID-19 pandemic has the potential to significantly affect the mental health of healthcare workers (HCWs), who stand in the frontline of this crisis. It is, therefore, an immediate priority to monitor rates of mood, sleep and other mental health issues in order to understand mediating factors and inform tailored interventions. The aim of this review is to synthesize and analyze existing evidence on the prevalence of depression, anxiety and insomnia among HCWs during the Covid-19 outbreak.
METHODS
A systematic search of literature databases was conducted up to April 17th, 2020. Two reviewers independently assessed full-text articles according to predefined criteria. Risk of bias for each individual study was assessed and data pooled using random-effects meta-analyses to estimate the prevalence of specific mental health problems. The review protocol is registered in PROSPERO and is available online.
FINDINGS
Thirteen studies were included in the analysis with a combined total of 33,062 participants. Anxiety was assessed in 12 studies, with a pooled prevalence of 23·2% and depression in 10 studies, with a prevalence rate of 22·8%. A subgroup analysis revealed gender and occupational differences with female HCPs and nurses exhibiting higher rates of affective symptoms compared to male and medical staff respectively. Finally, insomnia prevalence was estimated at 38·9% across 5 studies.
INTERPRETATION
Early evidence suggests that a considerable proportion of HCWs experience mood and sleep disturbances during this outbreak, stressing the need to establish ways to mitigate mental health risks and adjust interventions under pandemic conditions.
Topics: Anxiety; Betacoronavirus; COVID-19; Coronavirus Infections; Depression; Health Personnel; Humans; Nurses; Pandemics; Physicians; Pneumonia, Viral; Prevalence; SARS-CoV-2; Sex Distribution; Sleep Initiation and Maintenance Disorders
PubMed: 32437915
DOI: 10.1016/j.bbi.2020.05.026 -
Nutrients Dec 2020Stress is a natural response of the body, induced by factors of a physical (hunger, thirst, and infection) and/or psychological (perceived threat, anxiety, or concern)...
BACKGROUND
Stress is a natural response of the body, induced by factors of a physical (hunger, thirst, and infection) and/or psychological (perceived threat, anxiety, or concern) nature. Chronic, long-term stress may cause problems with sleep, concentration, and memory, as well as affective disorders. The passionflower () is a perennial plant with documented therapeutic properties. The literature data suggest that the passionflower itself, as well as its preparations, helps reduce stress and can therefore be helpful in the treatment of insomnia, anxiety, and depression. The objective of this systematic review was to evaluate in terms of its neuropsychiatric effects.
METHODS
The scientific databases PubMed, ClinTrials.gov, and Embase were searched up to 22 October 2019. The search identified randomized clinical trials describing the effects of in neuropsychiatric disorders.
RESULTS
The systematic review included nine clinical trials. The duration of the studies included in the analysis varied widely, from one day up to 30 days. Study participants were no less than 18 years old. In each of the papers, the effects of passionflower were measured by using a number of different tests and scales. The majority of studies reported reduced anxiety levels following the administration of preparations, with the effect less evident in people with mild anxiety symptoms. No adverse effects, including memory loss or collapse of psychometric functions, were observed.
CONCLUSION
may be helpful in treating some symptoms in neuropsychiatric patients.
Topics: Adult; Anti-Anxiety Agents; Anxiety Disorders; Female; Humans; Male; Memory; Passiflora; Phytotherapy; Plant Extracts; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Sleep; Sleep Initiation and Maintenance Disorders; Stress, Physiological; Young Adult
PubMed: 33352740
DOI: 10.3390/nu12123894 -
Frontiers in Psychology 2023Growing evidence from scientific research elucidates the important role of alexithymia in chronic immune diseases. This Review aims to explore the presence of... (Review)
Review
Growing evidence from scientific research elucidates the important role of alexithymia in chronic immune diseases. This Review aims to explore the presence of alexithymia in patients affected by asthma and clarify its associations with other involved psychological and physical factors. In January 2023, according to PRISMA guidelines, a systematic search using PubMed and Scopus was conducted. Twenty-six studies were eligible based on inclusion criteria. Alexithymia was significantly present in asthma patients, with most studies reporting a higher prevalence (from 9 to 62.8%) than in control groups (approximately 10%). The coexistence of asthma and alexithymia was associated with a worse quality of life, psychiatric comorbidity, poor symptom control, and difficulty in recognizing exacerbations of the disease. These results suggest that alexithymia can negatively impact the management of asthma. For this reason, we recommend an accuracy assessment in clinical settings and the implementation of psychological interventions to promote the emotional and physical wellbeing of asthmatic patients.
PubMed: 37609491
DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1221648 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Apr 2022Mindfulness-based smoking cessation interventions may aid smoking cessation by teaching individuals to pay attention to, and work mindfully with, negative affective... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Mindfulness-based smoking cessation interventions may aid smoking cessation by teaching individuals to pay attention to, and work mindfully with, negative affective states, cravings, and other symptoms of nicotine withdrawal. Types of mindfulness-based interventions include mindfulness training, which involves training in meditation; acceptance and commitment therapy (ACT); distress tolerance training; and yoga.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the efficacy of mindfulness-based interventions for smoking cessation among people who smoke, and whether these interventions have an effect on mental health outcomes.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group's specialised register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, and trial registries to 15 April 2021. We also employed an automated search strategy, developed as part of the Human Behaviour Change Project, using Microsoft Academic.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and cluster-RCTs that compared a mindfulness-based intervention for smoking cessation with another smoking cessation programme or no treatment, and assessed smoking cessation at six months or longer. We excluded studies that solely recruited pregnant women.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We followed standard Cochrane methods. We measured smoking cessation at the longest time point, using the most rigorous definition available, on an intention-to-treat basis. We calculated risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for smoking cessation for each study, where possible. We grouped eligible studies according to the type of intervention and type of comparator. We carried out meta-analyses where appropriate, using Mantel-Haenszel random-effects models. We summarised mental health outcomes narratively.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 21 studies, with 8186 participants. Most recruited adults from the community, and the majority (15 studies) were conducted in the USA. We judged four of the studies to be at low risk of bias, nine at unclear risk, and eight at high risk. Mindfulness-based interventions varied considerably in design and content, as did comparators, therefore, we pooled small groups of relatively comparable studies. We did not detect a clear benefit or harm of mindfulness training interventions on quit rates compared with intensity-matched smoking cessation treatment (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.46; I = 0%; 3 studies, 542 participants; low-certainty evidence), less intensive smoking cessation treatment (RR 1.19, 95% CI 0.65 to 2.19; I = 60%; 5 studies, 813 participants; very low-certainty evidence), or no treatment (RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.43 to 1.53; 1 study, 325 participants; low-certainty evidence). In each comparison, the 95% CI encompassed benefit (i.e. higher quit rates), harm (i.e. lower quit rates) and no difference. In one study of mindfulness-based relapse prevention, we did not detect a clear benefit or harm of the intervention over no treatment (RR 1.43, 95% CI 0.56 to 3.67; 86 participants; very low-certainty evidence). We did not detect a clear benefit or harm of ACT on quit rates compared with less intensive behavioural treatments, including nicotine replacement therapy alone (RR 1.27, 95% CI 0.53 to 3.02; 1 study, 102 participants; low-certainty evidence), brief advice (RR 1.27, 95% CI 0.59 to 2.75; 1 study, 144 participants; very low-certainty evidence), or less intensive ACT (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.50 to 2.01; 1 study, 100 participants; low-certainty evidence). There was a high level of heterogeneity (I = 82%) across studies comparing ACT with intensity-matched smoking cessation treatments, meaning it was not appropriate to report a pooled result. We did not detect a clear benefit or harm of distress tolerance training on quit rates compared with intensity-matched smoking cessation treatment (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.26 to 2.98; 1 study, 69 participants; low-certainty evidence) or less intensive smoking cessation treatment (RR 1.63, 95% CI 0.33 to 8.08; 1 study, 49 participants; low-certainty evidence). We did not detect a clear benefit or harm of yoga on quit rates compared with intensity-matched smoking cessation treatment (RR 1.44, 95% CI 0.40 to 5.16; 1 study, 55 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Excluding studies at high risk of bias did not substantially alter the results, nor did using complete case data as opposed to using data from all participants randomised. Nine studies reported on changes in mental health and well-being, including depression, anxiety, perceived stress, and negative and positive affect. Variation in measures and methodological differences between studies meant we could not meta-analyse these data. One study found a greater reduction in perceived stress in participants who received a face-to-face mindfulness training programme versus an intensity-matched programme. However, the remaining eight studies found no clinically meaningful differences in mental health and well-being between participants who received mindfulness-based treatments and participants who received another treatment or no treatment (very low-certainty evidence).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
We did not detect a clear benefit of mindfulness-based smoking cessation interventions for increasing smoking quit rates or changing mental health and well-being. This was the case when compared with intensity-matched smoking cessation treatment, less intensive smoking cessation treatment, or no treatment. However, the evidence was of low and very low certainty due to risk of bias, inconsistency, and imprecision, meaning future evidence may very likely change our interpretation of the results. Further RCTs of mindfulness-based interventions for smoking cessation compared with active comparators are needed. There is also a need for more consistent reporting of mental health and well-being outcomes in studies of mindfulness-based interventions for smoking cessation.
Topics: Adult; Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems; Female; Humans; Mindfulness; Nicotine; Smoking Cessation; Tobacco Use Cessation Devices
PubMed: 35420700
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD013696.pub2